Local Insights

Social media-fuelled demand for luxury counterfeits such as the ‘Takealot Tirkin’ is reshaping consumer culture across Africa and raising pressing questions for brands. Haadya Mosafeer of INLEX finds a potential answer in Mauritius’ response

Cwengile Cwele, with oversight from Chyreene Truluck of Spoor & Fisher South Africa, explains how the new process works and the implications for practitioners and rights holders

Pravir Palayathan of INLEX explains Mauritius’ customs-led system for protecting trademarks, regulating authorised importers and exporters, and swiftly seizing counterfeit goods

COVID-19 has changed the way we live, communicate and do business. In this time of drastic change and upheaval, innovative entrepreneurs and businesses across the world have used this opportunity to redefine ordinary business practices and bring new products and services to the market. New Zealand is no exception.

Entering a foreign market for one's products is usually made through direct investment or by way of licensing, such as forging a distributorship agreement. Such an agreement will be the law for the parties. For agreements involving the Philippines, other than the provisions stated in it, other laws relevant to said agreement are deemed included and must be complied with. An example is Article 19 of the Civil Code on the abuse of rights. Article 19 sets certain standards which must be observed not only in the exercise of one's rights but also in the performance of one's duties, i.e. to act with justice; to give everyone his due; and to observe honesty and good faith.

On May 20 2020, the Korean Patent Act (KPA) was amended such that mixed damages of lost profits and a reasonable royalty for patent infringement may be claimed by a patentee and awarded by the court. The amendment will apply to damages filed for on or after December 10 2020.

A Turkish case highlights the importance of Article 138(3) when patent claims are amended during an invalidation action, say Selin Sinem Erciyas, Aysel Korkmaz Yatkın, and Bengü Şen Gürakan of Gün + Partners

Jakob Pade Frederiksen of Inspicos provides a status update on the pending case in the lead-up to oral proceedings before the EPO Enlarged Board of Appeal on May 8 2026

Igor Charles and Fatima Chirazi of INLEX report on the rejection of Decathlon’s design, unfair competition, and parasitism claims over snorkelling masks, confirming a narrow scope of protection where design freedom is constrained

Eduardo Hallak, Juliana Neves, and Gabriela Monteiro of Licks Attorneys explain how Brazilian courts have reshaped divisional patent practice and assess the practical impact of the current framework

María Aurora García of Berken IP examines how Argentine courts are using dynamic injunctions to tackle illegal sports streaming, particularly in the context of major events such as the football World Cup

Brazil is establishing itself as a hub for biological agricultural formulations. Eduardo Hallak, Rafaella Oliveira, and Gislaine Zulli of Licks Attorneys analyse a fast-developing market and a decade of related patent activity

Luis Emilio Moncada of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains why provisional measures are an increasingly valuable mechanism under Mexican intellectual property law as the country prepares to co-host the football World Cup

Fernanda Villalobos of Becerril, Coca & Becerril explains how Mexican trademark law now allows descriptive signs to acquire protection through market use and consumer recognition

Stephania Cardiel of Becerril, Coca & Becerril examines how recent reforms signal a regional move towards faster, more internationally aligned innovation systems

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu considers how patent applicants may need to adapt their approaches as a result of widespread political and economic uncertainty

Jean-Paul Wagner and Tiago Leal of Ipsilon Luxembourg explore recent judicial advancements and global trends shaping the future of AI innovation, and how to turn informed intellectual property strategies into engines of commercial success

Raluca Vasilescu of Cabinet M Oproiu finds that AI assistants are not very helpful for building and enforcing patent strategies – and explains why